I should think it has approximately the same legal weight as a disclaimer saying "Using the right mouse button while reading this page is prohibited," or the logical extension, "changing the TV channel while ads are being displayed is a violation of our terms of service."
Now comes the scary question: What *is* that legal weight going to be, in the near future?
I must have explained that disabling Javascript removes the right-click block many times in public (whoops, again just now), and have told it individually in chat even more often! I'm so screwed!
And lynx is obviously contraband software as it bypasses all Javascript or Flash "protection" of websites.
File format has nothing to do with the difference between a website and a forum. Maybe to the one who published the information it doesn't matter. But if you're the owner of the forum (and you're likely to be, because it's easier to find the identity of the site owner than a forum member), chances are you're on trial for something your users did and you failed to prevent. That's a very real difference however you want to look at it.
And let's not forget what people have already been accused of or questioned for inciting terrorism over the internet. Apparently "let's pray that Bush gets hernia" qualifies.
I seem to remember a time when the chief purpose of advertisement was to inform people of a product they would be interested in. Since interest translates into money, that's pretty much what the advertiser was satisfied with. If you didn't want to look at the ads, you probably weren't going to buy anything anyway. Not even [i]spammers[/i] (which, before reading this article, I would have classed as the lowliest of advertisers) want to force you to read their email. They're happy with the tiny percentage that is interested in their trash.
It appears that at some point in the last years, advertisers have decided that the number of people who look at your ads is more important than the likelihood of them buying anything (perhaps inspired by said spammers). Combined with the tendency of the media industry to try to boss its customers around, you get this.
So, Disney, do you think that if you make me sit through an ad I can't skip, I'm more likely to buy whatever is advertised? Good luck.
Well, certainly foolproof! You just tell people to watch out for the URL and not enter their info if it's not a ".bank".
I mean, they check the URL so carefully now.
And hell, if "morganchase.bank" is the proper domain, then surely "morganchase.bank.cx" is just their server on Christmas Island. Isn't it?! What you say!!
Induction - doesn't this mean your hair will stand on end whenever you're holding cutlery? Or is the field too weak/short-ranged for humans to notice?
Re:Things like this are easy to fix.
on
Google's Evil NDA
·
· Score: 1
I have the book right here ("Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman"), and it says that he was being drafted, but rejected for medical reasons (which of course was the failed Psychiatric evaluation). So he wasn't actually dismissed, since he never joined in the first place.
Should I laugh because it's always nice to see the light dawning in some corporate executive's head?
Or should I laugh because, well, it's taken them pretty long to get the idea of trying a new business model that almost every successful internet company is using?
Or should I laugh because the idea of someone abandoning the existing video sites for what will inevitably a pit of censored and heavily DRM'd content is so patently ridiculous?
Doesn't this work both ways? The figures from TFA are above 10% pretty much everywhere, significantly above 20% in most of Europe. Where are the web designers who say "You must use Firefox to view this site"?
Or is this just because the very concept of good web design is to make a website work in any browser? Perhaps this is part of what has held IE in power for so long: Everywhere, badly designed websites say "use IE to make this work", but well-designed websites say (at most) "use any decent, W3C-conforming browser", or (very frequently) "this website is designed to work in any browser. Hell, even IE if you must."
Um, no. Students bullying a teacher is definitely not in the same category as students bullying a student or adults mobbing an adult. The balance of power alone takes care of that. These students have broken the rules. About the only thing they can get is detention. Anything above that - cutting computer classes in some perverted kind of collective punishment, or even litigating, is a ridiculous escalation.
The reaction of this principal shows that he should never have become a teacher in the first place. If he cannot deal with immature hostility in a superior and appropriate manner, he should stay the hell out of anything below college, where he can at least expect to deal with students as adults.
Slashdot Mirror
I should think it has approximately the same legal weight as a disclaimer saying "Using the right mouse button while reading this page is prohibited," or the logical extension, "changing the TV channel while ads are being displayed is a violation of our terms of service."
Now comes the scary question: What *is* that legal weight going to be, in the near future?
I must have explained that disabling Javascript removes the right-click block many times in public (whoops, again just now), and have told it individually in chat even more often! I'm so screwed!
And lynx is obviously contraband software as it bypasses all Javascript or Flash "protection" of websites.
Or, to put it more succinctly, OMFG MORONS!
From: thomson@symantec.com
To: gates@microsoft.com
CC: genuine-advantage@microsoft.com
Subject: Mission Accomplished
Hi Bill,
Done as requested. That will be one billion; pleasure doing business with you.
-John
> didn't just try to act like he knew what was going on
"It's not a big truck."
File format has nothing to do with the difference between a website and a forum. Maybe to the one who published the information it doesn't matter. But if you're the owner of the forum (and you're likely to be, because it's easier to find the identity of the site owner than a forum member), chances are you're on trial for something your users did and you failed to prevent. That's a very real difference however you want to look at it.
And let's not forget what people have already been accused of or questioned for inciting terrorism over the internet. Apparently "let's pray that Bush gets hernia" qualifies.
Maybe in whole numbers... I'd like to see that teacher add something up Pi times without using multiplication. :P
Cool, an XSS vulnerability in action!
Yay! I'll get popcorn!
Oh wait, that also means the tubes get clogged. Dang it.
If only I had mod points today...
I knew I have to read Vonnegut some time soon, but this only reinforces it. Genius...
But do they also claim that it is really the fault of those damn pirates?
I seem to remember a time when the chief purpose of advertisement was to inform people of a product they would be interested in. Since interest translates into money, that's pretty much what the advertiser was satisfied with. If you didn't want to look at the ads, you probably weren't going to buy anything anyway. Not even [i]spammers[/i] (which, before reading this article, I would have classed as the lowliest of advertisers) want to force you to read their email. They're happy with the tiny percentage that is interested in their trash.
It appears that at some point in the last years, advertisers have decided that the number of people who look at your ads is more important than the likelihood of them buying anything (perhaps inspired by said spammers). Combined with the tendency of the media industry to try to boss its customers around, you get this.
So, Disney, do you think that if you make me sit through an ad I can't skip, I'm more likely to buy whatever is advertised? Good luck.
Well, certainly foolproof! You just tell people to watch out for the URL and not enter their info if it's not a ".bank".
I mean, they check the URL so carefully now.
And hell, if "morganchase.bank" is the proper domain, then surely "morganchase.bank.cx" is just their server on Christmas Island. Isn't it?! What you say!!
> time server
Argh...
Induction - doesn't this mean your hair will stand on end whenever you're holding cutlery? Or is the field too weak/short-ranged for humans to notice?
I have the book right here ("Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman"), and it says that he was being drafted, but rejected for medical reasons (which of course was the failed Psychiatric evaluation). So he wasn't actually dismissed, since he never joined in the first place.
Should I laugh because it's always nice to see the light dawning in some corporate executive's head?
Or should I laugh because, well, it's taken them pretty long to get the idea of trying a new business model that almost every successful internet company is using?
Or should I laugh because the idea of someone abandoning the existing video sites for what will inevitably a pit of censored and heavily DRM'd content is so patently ridiculous?
Ah what the heck, I'll just laugh.
Microsoft has money too, and they put in tabs in the new version.
And to think how all the browser folks have been squabbling about who had them first...
You might get Britain. I'd say that counts... for the time being.
Doesn't this work both ways? The figures from TFA are above 10% pretty much everywhere, significantly above 20% in most of Europe. Where are the web designers who say "You must use Firefox to view this site"?
Or is this just because the very concept of good web design is to make a website work in any browser? Perhaps this is part of what has held IE in power for so long: Everywhere, badly designed websites say "use IE to make this work", but well-designed websites say (at most) "use any decent, W3C-conforming browser", or (very frequently) "this website is designed to work in any browser. Hell, even IE if you must."
Um, no. Students bullying a teacher is definitely not in the same category as students bullying a student or adults mobbing an adult. The balance of power alone takes care of that. These students have broken the rules. About the only thing they can get is detention. Anything above that - cutting computer classes in some perverted kind of collective punishment, or even litigating, is a ridiculous escalation.
The reaction of this principal shows that he should never have become a teacher in the first place. If he cannot deal with immature hostility in a superior and appropriate manner, he should stay the hell out of anything below college, where he can at least expect to deal with students as adults.
But you might want to have children at some point.
What is this, the set-up to a Hobbit reference?
But those aren't small steps, they're more like giant leaps. :P